Police cite Mt. Lebanon school board member with public drunkenness
Mt. Lebanon police cited school board member Scott Goldman for public drunkenness as he walked home from a bar.
Officers went to Dixon Avenue early Saturday morning to answer reports of an apparently intoxicated person walking in the middle of the road, police Lt. Aaron Lauth said Wednesday.
Officers found Goldman, 42, not far from his home on Racine Drive shortly before 2 a.m., and believed he was intoxicated enough to be a danger to himself or others, Lauth said.
Goldman did not respond to calls for comment.
Lauth said police usually try to release intoxicated people to someone who can take responsibility for their care and safety. When the officers found no one who could do so at Goldman's home, they took him to the police station.
“If we were to take him to his house, open the door and let him in, and later something were to happen to him, the question becomes, ‘Why didn't officers handle things differently?' ” Lauth said.
A public drunkenness citation can carry a fine between $25 and $300. Police held Goldman at the station until someone arrived to take custody of him.
According to the department's annual reports, Mt. Lebanon police issued 51 citations for public drunkenness in 2010, the most recent year available.
Goldman was elected to the school board in November.
Matthew Santoni is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. He can be reached at 412-380-5625 or firstname.lastname@example.org.
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments â either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.